Bigger, make sure that you are opening strong in the beginning—really nice flow that you are developing midway into the speech—
2nd—much better intro, make sure your tone matches up with your content—much more forceful comparisons
Rebuttal Redos, Thursday 8/7
1--efficiency and forcefulness are the big things you need to drill out, especially true at the beginning and in the education arguments
2--much better, tho we still have to get forcefulness out of your voice more--we also need to figure out the clarity version of this t
Advocacy Drills Friday 8/8
--use the phrase “sever perm”—it also makes linking negative arguments impossible
--give an example for the distinction between legal and ethical limitatiaons
--you need some sort of impact comparison towards the end
--make sure the 2ac does more than just read evidence, need some quick smart analytics and more use of the 1ac evidence to deal with a lot of the case arguments and argue that your impacts ow the disad
--nice job in the cross x sticking to your guns, especially in opposition to some stuff that people have debated a lot
--2ar needs an overview, telling the story, why the case impacts are going to matter the most
--you are doing a pretty nice job with your confidence and your general attitude
--you are doing a pretty good job of using evidence, but make sure you think about them as warrants, it’s the same as extending them parliwise
--watch out for stepping repeatedly from side to side, that gives the impressin of nervousness
Practice Round 8/13 (Kehl)
All in all the aff case is okay, although you have staked out extra topical plan. We still want to work on impacts though, for instance, on the heg advantage try to be more specific about where in the world an increase in US heg would be helpful. Negative case has some good ideas, but needs some more work on structure, as is the uniqueness is going the wrong way and the K criticizes imperialism but says that the impact is increased heg, this doesn't make any sense. The aff is still a little in the knee jerk reaction stage, which is to just argue against everything the neg said, when if you see what's going on strategically, you don't need to do that. For instance pointing out that their uniqueness goes the wrong way for them means you don't need to argue uniqueness going the opposite way. Everyone needs a little more work on time allocation, that means taking questions and also recognizing which arguments are important and which aren't (for instance this free clinics argument). The rebuttals are pretty good, the neg rebuttal is a little strange, but that mostly comes from the fact that the strategy doesn't make a lot of sense. The aff rebuttal is pretty strong, there aren't really new arguments and it's just an explanation of why we're winning our positions, we just need to take the final step to compare the probability, timeframe, magnitude and why our aff is the winning the round.
Impact Comparison Drill 8/12
--start a bit quicker, each fo the words in ur fist sentence is a bit too drawn out
--prerequisite argument is really nice
--you need to be a bit angrier, like you are when you get to being upset about the rich
--root cause argument is really nice as well, make sure you explain why the bio war he talks about is connected to this idea
--NICE (you got to exactly what I was saying above)
Topicality Drill 8/13
--very nice work with the interpretation debate
--overall very nice, you need more delineations of things like a caselist etc
Rebuttal Redo 8/14--Baxter
--“they spiked out of” “in round abuse”—give impacts to these claims, vote for you, what do you have to prove
--they concede that they are key to upwards mobility (explain the internal link) great job with the impact debate here
--explain the narrowness argument a bit more
Practice Debate 10 8/14 (Baxter)
Why is the permutation net beneficial? Not just not mutually exclusive, but actually better.
Solvency deficits.
Is there a separate advocacy to perm on the k?
You need some offense here. Why does their method fuck up something that the aff is trying to do?
Practice Debate 1 (Steve)
Mini Rebuttal Redo Practice
Bigger, make sure that you are opening strong in the beginning—really nice flow that you are developing midway into the speech—
2nd—much better intro, make sure your tone matches up with your content—much more forceful comparisons
Rebuttal Redos, Thursday 8/7
1--efficiency and forcefulness are the big things you need to drill out, especially true at the beginning and in the education arguments
2--much better, tho we still have to get forcefulness out of your voice more--we also need to figure out the clarity version of this t
Advocacy Drills Friday 8/8
--use the phrase “sever perm”—it also makes linking negative arguments impossible
--give an example for the distinction between legal and ethical limitatiaons
--you need some sort of impact comparison towards the end
Practice Debate Friday 8/8 (steve)
Practice Debate Monday 8/11 (Baxter)
--make sure the 2ac does more than just read evidence, need some quick smart analytics and more use of the 1ac evidence to deal with a lot of the case arguments and argue that your impacts ow the disad
--nice job in the cross x sticking to your guns, especially in opposition to some stuff that people have debated a lot
--2ar needs an overview, telling the story, why the case impacts are going to matter the most
--you are doing a pretty nice job with your confidence and your general attitude
--you are doing a pretty good job of using evidence, but make sure you think about them as warrants, it’s the same as extending them parliwise
--watch out for stepping repeatedly from side to side, that gives the impressin of nervousness
Practice Round 8/13 (Kehl)
All in all the aff case is okay, although you have staked out extra topical plan. We still want to work on impacts though, for instance, on the heg advantage try to be more specific about where in the world an increase in US heg would be helpful. Negative case has some good ideas, but needs some more work on structure, as is the uniqueness is going the wrong way and the K criticizes imperialism but says that the impact is increased heg, this doesn't make any sense. The aff is still a little in the knee jerk reaction stage, which is to just argue against everything the neg said, when if you see what's going on strategically, you don't need to do that. For instance pointing out that their uniqueness goes the wrong way for them means you don't need to argue uniqueness going the opposite way. Everyone needs a little more work on time allocation, that means taking questions and also recognizing which arguments are important and which aren't (for instance this free clinics argument). The rebuttals are pretty good, the neg rebuttal is a little strange, but that mostly comes from the fact that the strategy doesn't make a lot of sense. The aff rebuttal is pretty strong, there aren't really new arguments and it's just an explanation of why we're winning our positions, we just need to take the final step to compare the probability, timeframe, magnitude and why our aff is the winning the round.Impact Comparison Drill 8/12
--start a bit quicker, each fo the words in ur fist sentence is a bit too drawn out
--prerequisite argument is really nice
--you need to be a bit angrier, like you are when you get to being upset about the rich
--root cause argument is really nice as well, make sure you explain why the bio war he talks about is connected to this idea
--NICE (you got to exactly what I was saying above)
Topicality Drill 8/13
--very nice work with the interpretation debate
--overall very nice, you need more delineations of things like a caselist etc
Rebuttal Redo 8/14--Baxter
--“they spiked out of” “in round abuse”—give impacts to these claims, vote for you, what do you have to prove
--they concede that they are key to upwards mobility (explain the internal link) great job with the impact debate here
--explain the narrowness argument a bit more
Practice Debate 10 8/14 (Baxter)
Why is the permutation net beneficial? Not just not mutually exclusive, but actually better.
Solvency deficits.
Is there a separate advocacy to perm on the k?
You need some offense here. Why does their method fuck up something that the aff is trying to do?
Practice Debate 10 8/14 (Steve)